A major datacentre expansion in Footscray is now at the centre of a dispute over planning approval, local opposition and the use of artificial intelligence in political lobbying. NextDC has applied to the Victorian government for fast-tracked approval to expand its M3 datacentre across 10 hectares.
The application has drawn attention because of the site’s size, its power demand and its proximity to homes. Some residential properties sit within 15 metres of the datacentre’s boundary, while more than 800 homes are within 500 metres of the site.
A Large Expansion Beside Footscray Homes
NextDC’s Footscray datacentre covers 10 hectares and draws 225MW of power. The scale of the facility has led to growing complaints from local residents, with the distance between the datacentre and nearby homes adding to concerns about the expansion.
The company has lodged its request with the Victorian government as it seeks fast-tracked approval for M3. That request has placed the project in a political setting where community opposition and government decision-making now sit alongside questions about how lobbying material was prepared.
Katie Hall, a Labor MP and opponent of the datacentre expansion, outlined her concerns about the project last month, in August 2026. She had also written to the planning minister in April, although the year of that letter is not specified.
The facts surrounding the application set out a clear conflict: NextDC wants approval to expand a 10-hectare facility, while residents are raising complaints about a site that stands close to homes. The figures make the dispute concrete, with some houses only 15 metres from the boundary and more than 800 homes located within 500 metres.
Minister Rejects Request for Support
On 3 September, Melissa Horne requested that Craig Scroggie intercede on behalf of NextDC. Scroggie is the company’s CEO, while Horne is a Victorian cabinet minister.
Horne later made clear that she would not support the application. In a letter, she wrote: “I refer to you correspondence on 3 September requesting that I intercede on behalf of NextDC Limited in the decision of the minister for planning …”
She then stated: “I do not believe that it would be appropriate for me to lend my support to the application and nor do I wish to.”
That response places the request for ministerial support directly against Horne’s stated position. The application remains tied to the broader question of how the Victorian government will handle the proposed expansion, as local complaints continue to focus on the facility’s footprint and closeness to residential homes.
AI Enters the Lobbying Dispute
The political disagreement took another turn when Horne accused Scroggie of using artificial intelligence to write his letter. She cited what she alleged were basic factual errors in the correspondence.
Her response included a direct warning: “I suggest that you review content produced by artificial intelligence more closely in the future.”
That line gives the dispute an unusual technology angle. The issue is not only whether NextDC should receive fast-tracked approval for M3, but also whether artificial intelligence helped produce lobbying material containing basic factual errors.
The named figures connected to the wider political and corporate setting include Victorian premier Ben Carroll, former adviser Ken McAlpine, who is employed by NextDC, and Anthony Carbines, the Victorian artificial intelligence minister. The dispute therefore brings together a datacentre company, Victorian government figures, an AI minister and a Labor MP who opposes the expansion.
NextDC’s application now sits against three fixed points: a 10-hectare Footscray facility, 225MW of power demand and homes located close to the site. Add the disagreement over ministerial support and Horne’s accusation about AI-generated content, and the project has become a test of how technology companies present major infrastructure proposals to government.
The next stage will keep attention on the Victorian government’s decision over fast-tracked approval, the concerns raised by Katie Hall and the complaints from Footscray residents. It will also leave a sharper question hanging over AI-assisted lobbying: when a letter contains basic factual errors, who is responsible for checking it before it reaches a minister?
